With Kamala Harris stepping into Joe Biden’s shoes as the Democratic presidential candidate, the political dynamics of the 2024 election took an abrupt pivot. Not only did the atmosphere of the campaign transform but the vocabulary utilized also changed noticeably. Harris and her supporters injected new, questionable phrases into the political discourse even before the Democratic National Convention kicked off. Her followers boasted about being ‘coconut-pilled’ and the candidate herself was labelled ‘brat’ by singer Charli XCX. Not forgetting the attempts to label her adversaries as ‘weird’. Such terms in the political arena reflect an attempt to recyle the old as new.
Just over a month prior, the anticipated rematch between the president and his predecessor was predicted to be a resurrection of well-used expressions and overused clichés. During the July convention in Milwaukee, the Republicans focused their rhetoric on national pride, anti-elitism and celebrating Trump’s victories, refining these ideas to counter an incumbent they perceived as weak. We can only surmise what the tone of Biden’s convention might have been like due to this unexpected change. Politics in essence, took a sweeping turn with this shift in power.
Harris’s nominating speech stirred up a new path for the Democrats, despite containing familiar echoes to party tradition, like references to the Obamas and Clintons. A novel interpretation of the Democratic Party was heralded, bringing about considerable redefinition of its vocabulary. The Democratic Party’s perception of itself was revealed through this surge of words at the United Center, foretelling a whirlwind of more contentions to follow. Here are a few of the disputable themes that define the Harris era.
The Democrats’ stance against Trump is centered on a single word – ‘Back’. Their promise is never to go ‘back’. While Trump pledges to restore America’s glory, his opponents criticize this aspiration as a return to the unpalatable past; a history they collectively revile. The Democrats’ opposing views on history also include Trump’s tenure — what was extolled as a golden era by Republicans, was portrayed as a nightmare by the Democrats. Here, it seemed that political ideologies are deeply entrenched in varied understandings of time, inclining towards either progress or loss.
The topic of ‘crowd size’ is apparently a point of cardinal importance to some. The verbal volleys targeted at Trump during the four day speech marathon labeled him as selfish, dangerous, and disobedient among other disillusioned epithets. His patriotism was called into question, in addition to his honesty and commitment to work. However, an outlandish accusation that tried to puncture his ego was the repeated characterization of Trump as a ‘small man’.
The term ‘Dad’ found special mention in the Democratic Convention. When Governor Tim Walz acknowledged his family from the stage, his son, Gus, rose, overcome with emotion. The commodification of this deeply personal moment intended to express Walz’s prototypical dadness for political capital, a blatant marketing attempt at an event aimed at raising a woman to power. Walz was not alone; other political figures also brought aspects of their fatherhood experiences to the forefront as part of their political identities, representing a non-patriarchal narrative of fatherhood.
Meanwhile, ‘freedom’ was a another buzzword frequently used. Republicans, in Milwaukee, adopted the traditionally left-leaning language to position themselves as allies of the common man. Their interpretation of class consciousness was more of cultural conflict rather than economic struggle. An analogous narrative was attempted by the Democrats, with assistance from Beyoncé, around the notion of ‘freedom’. The Harris campaign sought to redefine the traditionally conservative word ‘freedom’, giving it a new abolitionist and civil rights movement’s flavor.
Michelle Obama’s speech, despite its severe critique of Trump and Trumpism, contained a peculiar advisory to her party colleagues. She cautioned against the liberal-left coalition’s tendencies of seeking perfection, conducting purity-tests and demonstrating anticipatory disappointment. Her remarks appeared aimed at curbing the frivolous satisfaction found in performing mundane tasks, reflecting the need for a pragmatic and practical approach in a closely contested election.
One word that would not have been expected to feature in any political consultation was a sense of ‘cooperation amidst competition’. The campaigners unwittingly adopted it, but what started as a sequence of memes and laughter slowly integrated into the fabric of the Democratic representation. Clearly, a peculiar alliance under the Democratic banner was inadvertently formed.
Harris’s campaign catchphrase ‘Kamala Harris for the people’ attempts a triple raid on Republican linguistic territory. This motto overtly employs the language of law and order, seizing from her professional background as a district attorney. It tries to placate left-wing distrust for the system, while appropriating the populist language that hails from the Republican’s most famous speech. This rebranding skips over the realities of a deeply flawed criminal justice system while seeking to project an image of fairness and justice.